Summary: New research finds that people often expect to feel worse when they tell others about their own good deeds than when they keep those acts private or share personal achievements. Across five studies, participants anticipated greater shame and embarrassment when publicizing altruistic behavior, in part because they feared appearing motivated by reputation or social credit.
This “do-gooder dilemma” becomes more pronounced on social media, where concerns about reputation are amplified. Curiously, people predicted that other people would feel much less negative about sharing similar good deeds — revealing a gap between how we expect to feel ourselves and how we imagine others feel.
Key Facts
- Emotional cost: People anticipate embarrassment and shame when they share their own good deeds, especially online.
- Reputational fear: Publicizing altruism can feel risky because it may be perceived as self-promotion.
- Empathy gap: Individuals think others would react more positively to sharing good deeds than they themselves would.
Source: Cornell University
Case example: Jerry Richardson, a doctoral candidate in psychology, once stopped himself from mentioning an impulsive act of kindness to his friends. On his way to a dinner party he bought $7 worth of groceries for a man asking for help. Although the recipient’s gratitude felt rewarding, Richardson felt a sudden discomfort at the thought of talking about it. He decided not to tell his dinner companions — and later chose not to post about it on social media. That uncomfortable reaction prompted Richardson and his colleagues to study how people perceive the emotional consequences of reporting their own good deeds.
Richardson is the lead author of the paper “The Do-gooder Dilemma,” published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. His co-authors include Paul Bloom (University of Toronto), Shaun Nichols (Distinguished Professor of Arts and Sciences in Philosophy), and David Pizarro (Professor of Psychology), all of whom contributed to the project conducted at Cornell.
Across five preregistered experiments with a total sample of 2,840 participants, the researchers tested how people expected to feel after reporting altruistic acts versus personal achievements. Participants were asked to recall a past good deed and a personal success, then rate their feelings of happiness, pride, shame and embarrassment in relation to both acts. They also imagined how those feelings would change if they told a friend or posted about the events on social media.
The results were consistent: participants predicted more shame and embarrassment when they considered sharing a good deed, especially via social media. In contrast, they expected to feel more pride and happiness when sharing an achievement such as a promotion or award. The authors suggest this difference stems from concerns that reporting a good deed might be interpreted as self-interested reputation-seeking.
“People seem intuitively aware that publicizing a charitable act could lead others to infer self-serving motives,” Richardson explained. That concern was strongest for social media posts, which participants judged as more likely to trigger reputational backlash than telling a close friend. The researchers propose that this reputational cost can erode the “warm glow” associated with doing good, replacing it with embarrassment or shame.
Another notable finding was an asymmetry in self-versus-other predictions. Participants believed they themselves would feel worse after reporting a good deed, yet they expected others to feel better in the same situation — experiencing less embarrassment and more pride. The authors attribute this to the difficulty of accurately simulating another person’s inner emotional state: we have richer access to our own feelings and consequently anticipate stronger negative reactions.
The study’s implications are practical as well as psychological. Richardson notes that openly broadcasting one’s own charitable acts may be a poor strategy for signaling moral character, since the act of sharing can trigger negative feelings that undermine the original altruistic motivation. The famous observation attributed to Oscar Wilde — that the nicest feeling is to do a good deed anonymously and have someone discover it — resonates with the researchers’ conclusion.
Editorial notes:
– This article was written and edited by a Neuroscience News editor.
– The journal article was reviewed in full and summarized for clarity.
– Additional contextualization added by editorial staff.
Key questions answered
A: Most people predict that others would feel better — experiencing more pride and less shame — than they themselves expect to feel.
A: No. Participants expected to feel proud and happy when sharing personal accomplishments, while they anticipated shame and embarrassment when sharing good deeds.
A: The research suggests people worry that sharing altruism will be perceived as self-promotional, which generates reputational concerns and negative emotions, particularly on social platforms.
About this psychology research news
Author: Ellen Leventry
Source: Cornell University
Contact: Ellen Leventry – Cornell University
Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News
Original research: Open access. “The do-gooder dilemma: A self/other asymmetry in the perceived emotional costs of self-reporting good deeds” by Jerry Richardson et al., Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (November issue).
Abstract
The do-gooder dilemma: A self/other asymmetry in the perceived emotional costs of self-reporting good deeds
Recent campaigns encouraging people to share stories of charitable giving on social platforms suggest such sharing can normalize prosocial behavior and boost donations. However, the researchers hypothesized that publicizing one’s good deeds might also carry emotional costs that reduce the warm feelings of altruism.
Across five preregistered experiments (N = 2,840), participants reported they would feel worse after sharing their own good deeds than after sharing personal achievements, and they expected these negative feelings to be strongest when posting on social media versus telling a friend or not sharing at all. In contrast, participants predicted that others would feel better — experiencing less shame and embarrassment and more pride and happiness — than they themselves would after reporting good deeds. The studies indicate that people believe (1) sharing their own good deeds will leave them feeling worse, and (2) others will not experience the same negative emotional response.